Wall Sections Question

[Anonymous]

Hello everyone,

I am new to Archicad (just picked it up last week) and am a student currently enrolled at Mohawk College in Ontario for the Architectural Technology program.

The time has come to do presentation drawings and I have taken the time to go out and search for rendering software. Archicad was my choice due to its flexibility and capabilities.

Our current project is to model a house, I was able to create the walls, roofs, and generally create a passable render of the house. Only problem is now I need to do cross sections of my house and am running into problems.

All of my walls are solid slabs, with paint on each side (yes I know I'm still new) my question I guess is am I able to create studs within those walls and specify details for each of those slabs (ie 2X4s @ 16" throughout walls) and have Archicad generate those automatically or do I need to go through and manually create each of the objects (ie bricks, framing, etc etc). The same goes for my main floor, am I able to specify floor joists at 'x' inches or not?

The details are something I am a bit concerned about and if Archicad can generate them automatically than I will stick with it. Unfortuneatly I am the only person in our class that has taken the time to go out and learn Archicad if this process is not simple I will be forced to go back to Autocad for my cross sections

Any help on this subject is greatly appreciated and if you can direct me to a guide or any other reference that would be great as well!

Thanks and I look forward to hearing back from you guys

Kyle Parry

[Eduardo Rolon]

At the school I teach I know about a student that says he was flunked out because his professor asked about a specific section of his design and he said "No problem. how many more sections do you need". I have not asked that particular professor about it, Based on that my standard rule for the students I teach AC to is to act humble, do not show what AC can do and keep the laptop out of the reach of the prof. That is unless I am the one teaching the design class then the rules change.

[Dwight]

Certainly, bragging about software is dangerous because architecture school is supposed to be about ideas and not gimmicks. "Cheap draftman tricks" as my beloved professor once said. Actually, he said "Atkinson, why don't you quit? Your work is nothing but cheap draftman tricks." I will cry when I spit on his grave.
The drift I get from our local school (they are "ecumenical" about software) is that the laborious drawing of plans and sections helps the student "ponder" and develop ideas - its a forum for discussion. Drawings, partly resolved, moving from the general to the specific reinforce how designs are developed.
Computer design - the model and ideas behind it - tends to be a hidden process, not an open one. It is hard to show the process on that tiny screen.

Dismissing an instructor's request for more thought and information with "I'll just use my powerful weapons to shut you up." deserves censure.

Success with computers at school comes with the ability to evaluate a broad range of design ideas and using the evidence to further the strength of a position. You probably don't need buidling details for this, but other narrative elements - volume analysis, view corridors - things that are hard to do with pencil.

Don't forget that architecture school is way more about performance and story telling than it is about technology.

[Eduardo Rolon]

Dwight wrote:
…
Don't forget that architecture school is way more about performance and story telling than it is about technology.

Couldn't agree more. That is why when I teach the class I change the rules. The basic operational concept is "I don't care what you use as long as the design solution is there and understandable, you can use drafting dots for all I care".

[Dwight]

There's a problem.
There's only so much time.

Computers are seductive and I fear that so much time gets invested in getting the imagery out, that there isn't time left for architectectural thought.

What say you to this fear?

[Anonymous]

Ha Hello again guys, I can see I have caused quite a discussion in this topic XD

Anyways here is an image I have available at school, I have many more at home, I also went out and learned Artlantis and taught myself how to use it XD

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/9799/bedroomartlantisrs4.jpg

I will have other images available later, and just to clarify, our teacher is actually allowing me to use archicad just so long as I show her my drawings in Autocad as well. The thing is this is only our second semester and building code is starting to be strongly enforced within our designs. I think they feel that if we use a program such as archicad alot of the different parameters are already in place.

We actually will be taught Architectural Desktop and VIZ later on in our schooling however I took it upon myself to learn Archicad because I felt it was a cleaner and nicer program than Architectural Desktop is.

Nevertheless I will be using both, I enjoy learning new things about not only archicad but the manual drafting style of autocad due to the fact that it MAKES me draw everything over and over again, and there is no better way to remember something that constant repitition.

The image above is a result of both ArchiCAD and Artlantis. It is a small corner in the back of the house of the master bedroom. Sorry if it is ugly, to be honest this is our first project where we had full ability to design whatever we wanted.

The good news is I got 10/10 and 5/5 on both of my projects (both portfolio and renders) due to Archicad and she has yet to see the stuff I completed with artlantis.

[Dwight]

It is good to know many applications since in two or three or five years it will all be different so you need adaptability.

For instance, I am working on a new application called "WavingYourArmsintheAirCAD."
Just wave your arms in the air and the computer does the rest.

[Anonymous]

Dwight wrote:
Computers are seductive and I fear that so much time gets invested in getting the imagery out, that there isn't time left for architectectural thought.

You mean, as much time as you used to invest in perfecting hand drawing techniques?

Dwight wrote:
For instance, I am working on a new application called "WavingYourArmsintheAirCAD."
Just wave your arms in the air and the computer does the rest.

Then you should talk to these guys: http://www.frontdesign.se/

[Anonymous]

kyle.parry wrote:
Unfortuneatly my teacher thinks archiCAD is cheating when it comes to designing your crosssections and elevations

At least she has a clue what you can do with the program, apparently. I'm only just seeing some of my instructors starting to even realize that CAD of any sort is actually a viable means of producing drawings.

I've got an instructor who didn't even know the difference between Archicad and Autocad a year or so ago, and had them completely confused, one for the other, even though I think that she herself used Autocad. She couldn't even grasp what I was doing with cutaway sections, and that what I really had there *was* an actual model of the building, and that I really could tell *more* about what was going on inside it with AC than I ever could have with a physical model. I cannot for the life of me figure out what she couldn't figure out, but she couldn't.

She's seen the light now, thankfully, thanks to her firm having now partially adopted Archicad, and has decided to let me finish the project I'm working on now in just AC, and not make me build physical models on top of it. This is a development my arthritic body really welcomes.

I do have to tell you, though, that I think that one can get really lazy really quickly with Archicad, and I've seen it happen to me. It's very easy to get lulled into a very false sense of security, thinking that the program is so smart you don't have to worry about things like line weights or line types, especially in drawings like sections and elevations. It's easy to just think that AC will do it all for you, and do it right.

Well, yes, it does - sort of. But you still have to set a fair number of parameters yourself in order to ensure it actually works right, and it's easy to get lulled into a false sense of security that you know what's what in an elevation or section.

Manually drawing everything (whether by hand or by means of an electronic pencil like Autocad) does, I think, connect one better to the knowledge of how one drawing relates to another, but this is not an insurmountable issue by any means. It just means you can't let the power of the program lull you into forgetting the basics of drafting, and not paying attention to making sure things like line weights actually do come out the way you need them to - and that you know what each line on your elevations and sections really is.

Wendy